runningman1 Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 Way too simplistic. It isn't a coincidence but it's not the cause of the impoverishment either. Correlation is not equal to causation. Sometimes it is. Especially when the correlation is repeated so many times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 With regards to the 2nd point. I don't think it is only the council at all. I am countering the ludicrous claim that the impact a local council has is "very limited". With regards to the first point, you make a goid deal of sense in the short term. However, the needs of the poor are to get richer and the labour party need to do more to achieve this. You are being too simplistic and overestimating the effect a council has on making an area properous or not. Labour areas tend to be urban and poor becayse those are the constituents, whereas cons tend to dominate rural and prosperous areas becayse thats where the voters choose to live. Economics has much more influence on whether an area is successful or not. In terms of the NS divide then its driven by London and the financial services economy, not which local council is involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runningman1 Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 You are being too simplistic and overestimating the effect a council has on making an area properous or not. Labour areas tend to be urban and poor becayse those are the constituents, whereas cons tend to dominate rural and prosperous areas becayse thats where the voters choose to live. Economics has much more influence on whether an area is successful or not. In terms of the NS divide then its driven by London and the financial services economy, not which local council is involved. What do you mean I am overestimating? I am saying that they have an impact, I am contradicting someine who said local councils have almost no impact on the local economy. I have not said it is a massive impact, nor even a medium impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 What do you mean I am overestimating? I am saying that they have an impact, I am contradicting someine who said local councils have almost no impact on the local economy. I have not said it is a massive impact, nor even a medium impact. Does an mp make a difference? You can bet that if Scunthorpe and Redcar were swing/marginal seats somebody might have found a few quid. But back to the OP you can't force businesses to move/invest in places they don't want to go. They want to invest in the south east because that's where their competitors/suppliers are. People in London are always slightly surprised when they ring me up (0800 no) and find I'm not within the M25. Is that the problem - to inward looking in the south east? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 What do you mean I am overestimating? I am saying that they have an impact, I am contradicting someine who said local councils have almost no impact on the local economy. I have not said it is a massive impact, nor even a medium impact. Everyone agrees they have an impact. I just said it wasnt that significant when compared to other economic factors like skilled workforce, government policy, location, affluence of residents, existing market, global events etc. Why are Labour muslim haters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runningman1 Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 Everyone agrees they have an impact. I just said it wasnt that significant when compared to other economic factors like skilled workforce, government policy, location, affluence of residents, existing market, global events etc. Why are Labour muslim haters? You said the impact of local councils on the local economy was "very limited", I contest this. I agree that the things you have just mentioned also impact local economies. Labour are Muslim (or brown people) haters because of the 500,000 to 1.3 million (estimates vary) of dead Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan. Had the citizens of this country not been Muslim and/or brown, we would not have invaded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 You said the impact of local councils on the local economy was "very limited", I contest this. I agree that the things you have just mentioned also impact local economies. Labour are Muslim (or brown people) haters because of the 500,000 to 1.3 million (estimates vary) of dead Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan. Had the citizens of this country not been Muslim and/or brown, we would not have invaded. You are assuming a Council has such a significant impact on the prosperity of a local area or that local areas started on an equal footing. You are changing it again. thats what i said and it was in the context of which areas are successful or not. The reason areas in the South are more propserous has much more to do with historical factors than which council was in charge. Propserous areas will naturally be conservative, because its self interest from the people who are already there. Whether an area is successful or not has significantly more to do historical factors like location, the existence of a skilled workforce and market and world economic events. Local councils have very little impact on those areas. They have some but its limited. The UK economy is dominated these days by London and Financial Services from the City. Local government didnt create these. As for your muslim hater theory then maybe another thread. It just seemed random and I wondered why you had included it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandy18 Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 You are changing it again. thats what i said and it was in the context of which areas are successful or not. The reason areas in the South are more propserous has much more to do with historical factors than which council was in charge. Propserous areas will naturally be conservative, because its self interest from the people who are already there. Whether an area is successful or not has significantly more to do historical factors like location, the existence of a skilled workforce and market and world economic events. Local councils have very little impact on those areas. They have some but its limited. The UK economy is dominated these days by London and Financial Services from the City. Local government didnt create these. As for your muslim hater theory then maybe another thread. It just seemed random and I wondered why you had included it. Not according to this. ONS produces interactive map showing economic activity across UK http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/HTMLDocs/dvc134_d/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 Not according to this. ONS produces interactive map showing economic activity across UK http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/HTMLDocs/dvc134_d/index.html Think youll find the very dark area covers the City and the surrounding areas are all supporting it becaise they are areas within easy commuting distance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 London is the worlds number one financial powerhouse. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Financial_Centres_Index To use a football analogy - the north might scrape in toward the middle of League One. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now